A Matter of Opinion

Newspaper editorials across the country have had a lot to say about
the No Child Left Behind Act, whether defending it, lambasting it, or
falling somewhere in the middle. They have also passed judgment on the
actions of federal, state, and local officials in carrying out the
law.

On March 21, the Chicago Tribune devoted its entire main
editorial column to a discussion of the law titled "The school reform
backlash." The paper remains firmly in favor of the law. The Plain
Dealer of Cleveland has written nearly 20 editorials about the law
since last summer.

Below is a sampling of opinion from recent months:

Albuquerque Tribune
March 16, 2004:
"It’s time for New Mexico to leave President Bush’s sad
excuse for education reform behind. Despite claims to the contrary, the
No Child Left Behind Act is a catastrophe in the making."

Arkansas Democrat Gazette
(Little Rock) June 6, 2004:
"In essence, all No Child Left Behind asks is a little accountability,
which is just what alarms too much of this country’s educational
establishment."

The Boston Globe
March 26, 2004:
"The federal No Child Left Behind Act is badly underfunded and too
inflexible to be effective as an education reform measure. Corrective
legislation may be needed to ensure that the 2002 law lives up to its
promise: ensuring that every child in the nation has access to high-
quality schools."

Chicago Tribune
March 21, 2004:
"Some of the law’s rules need to be tweaked, and in some cases
they have been. But the main mission of the law should be unquestioned:
Schools will be held accountable for their record in teaching all
children, regardless of race, income, or disability."

The Des Moines Register
Nov. 30, 2003:
"It is heavy handed, underfunded, and top-down federal intrusion into
local schools. All these flaws flow from one fundamental
misconception— that schools alone can fix every child’s
problem. To really leave no child behind, the act should be replaced
with a series of initiatives to improve the lives of children
generally—in and out of school."

The New York Times
March 2, 2004:
"The new law will need tinkering here and there. But its goal and its
general roadmap for getting there are the right ones. For the effort to
truly equalize education to succeed, Congress will need to fight off
destructive schemes by lobbyists and bureaucrats of both parties who
are working hard to undermine the new initiative and to preserve the
bad old status quo."

The Plain Dealer
(Cleveland) March 24, 2004:
"Certainly, some critiques are valid, but the overarching principles
behind the legislation remain admirable—and important. Thus,
while administration officials work to make their accountability
efforts more palatable, they must be careful not to make them so meek
as to be irrelevant."

San Jose Mercury News
March 31, 2004:
"For the fourth time in weeks, the federal Department of Education has
budged on onerous demands of No Child Left Behind. Throw in a few more
changes, and the education law may make sense."

The Wall Street Journal
Feb. 15, 2004:
"Critics of President Bush’s education program, the No Child Left
Behind Act, now accuse him of enforcing the law on the cheap. We agree
the law has its faults, and said so when it roared through Congress two
years ago, but lack of funding isn’t close to being one of them.
… [T]he law at least signaled a federal commitment to
standards-based reform. Given who’s now complaining loudest, the
reform seems to be working. Accountability measures are in place and
money isn’t simply flowing to the states for nothing in
return."

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.